Adverse effects of immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system that affects mainly young adults (two to three times more frequently in women than in men) and causes significant disability after onset. Although it is accepted that immunotherapies for people with MS decrease disease activity, uncertainty regarding their relative safety remains.

OBJECTIVES

To compare adverse effects of immunotherapies for people with MS or clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), and to rank these treatments according to their relative risks of adverse effects through network meta-analyses (NMAs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, two other databases and trials registers up to March 2022, together with reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included participants 18 years of age or older with a diagnosis of MS or CIS, according to any accepted diagnostic criteria, who were included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined one or more of the agents used in MS or CIS, and compared them versus placebo or another active agent. We excluded RCTs in which a drug regimen was compared with a different regimen of the same drug without another active agent or placebo as a control arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for data extraction and pairwise meta-analyses. For NMAs, we used the netmeta suite of commands in R to fit random-effects NMAs assuming a common between-study variance. We used the CINeMA platform to GRADE the certainty of the body of evidence in NMAs. We considered a relative risk (RR) of 1.5 as a non-inferiority safety threshold compared to placebo. We assessed the certainty of evidence for primary outcomes within the NMA according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate or high.

MAIN RESULTS

This NMA included 123 trials with 57,682 participants. Serious adverse events (SAEs) Reporting of SAEs was available from 84 studies including 5696 (11%) events in 51,833 (89.9%) participants out of 57,682 participants in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of SAEs, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 18 additional people would have a SAE compared to placebo. Low-certainty evidence suggested that three drugs may decrease SAEs compared to placebo (relative risk [RR], 95% confidence interval [CI]): interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (0.78, 0.66 to 0.94); dimethyl fumarate (0.79, 0.67 to 0.93), and glatiramer acetate (0.84, 0.72 to 0.98). Several drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo: moderate-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.08, 0.88 to 1.31); low-certainty evidence for ocrelizumab (0.85, 0.67 to 1.07), ozanimod (0.88, 0.59 to 1.33), interferon beta-1b (0.94, 0.78 to 1.12), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (0.96, 0.80 to 1.15), natalizumab (0.97, 0.79 to 1.19), fingolimod (1.05, 0.92 to 1.20) and laquinimod (1.06, 0.83 to 1.34); very low-certainty evidence for daclizumab (0.83, 0.68 to 1.02). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the other drugs: low-certainty evidence for cladribine (1.10, 0.79 to 1.52), siponimod (1.20, 0.95 to 1.51), ofatumumab (1.26, 0.88 to 1.79) and rituximab (1.01, 0.67 to 1.52); very low-certainty evidence for immunoglobulins (1.05, 0.33 to 3.32), diroximel fumarate (1.05, 0.23 to 4.69), peg-interferon beta-1a (1.07, 0.66 to 1.74), alemtuzumab (1.16, 0.85 to 1.60), interferons (1.62, 0.21 to 12.72) and azathioprine (3.62, 0.76 to 17.19). Withdrawals due to adverse events Reporting of withdrawals due to AEs was available from 105 studies (85.4%) including 3537 (6.39%) events in 55,320 (95.9%) patients out of 57,682 patients in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of withdrawals, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 31 additional people would withdraw compared to placebo. No drug reduced withdrawals due to adverse events when compared with placebo. There was very low-certainty evidence (meaning that estimates are not reliable) that two drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo, assuming an upper 95% CI RR limit of 1.5: diroximel fumarate (0.38, 0.11 to 1.27) and alemtuzumab (0.63, 0.33 to 1.19). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the following drugs: low-certainty evidence for ofatumumab (1.50, 0.87 to 2.59); very low-certainty evidence for methotrexate (0.94, 0.02 to 46.70), corticosteroids (1.05, 0.16 to 7.14), ozanimod (1.06, 0.58 to 1.93), natalizumab (1.20, 0.77 to 1.85), ocrelizumab (1.32, 0.81 to 2.14), dimethyl fumarate (1.34, 0.96 to 1.86), siponimod (1.63, 0.96 to 2.79), rituximab (1.63, 0.53 to 5.00), cladribine (1.80, 0.89 to 3.62), mitoxantrone (2.11, 0.50 to 8.87), interferons (3.47, 0.95 to 12.72), and cyclophosphamide (3.86, 0.45 to 33.50). Eleven drugs may have increased withdrawals due to adverse events compared with placebo: low-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.37, 1.01 to 1.85), glatiramer acetate (1.76, 1.36 to 2.26), fingolimod (1.79, 1.40 to 2.28), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (2.15, 1.58 to 2.93), daclizumab (2.19, 1.31 to 3.65) and interferon beta-1b (2.59, 1.87 to 3.77); very low-certainty evidence for laquinimod (1.42, 1.01 to 2.00), interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (1.54, 1.13 to 2.10), immunoglobulins (1.87, 1.01 to 3.45), peg-interferon beta-1a (3.46, 1.44 to 8.33) and azathioprine (6.95, 2.57 to 18.78); however, very low-certainty evidence is unreliable. Sensitivity analyses including only studies with low attrition bias, drug dose above the group median, or only patients with relapsing remitting MS or CIS, and subgroup analyses by prior disease-modifying treatments did not change these figures. Rankings No drug yielded consistent P scores in the upper quartile of the probability of being better than others for primary and secondary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found mostly low and very low-certainty evidence that drugs used to treat MS may not increase SAEs, but may increase withdrawals compared with placebo. The results suggest that there is no important difference in the occurrence of SAEs between first- and second-line drugs and between oral, injectable, or infused drugs, compared with placebo. Our review, along with other work in the literature, confirms poor-quality reporting of adverse events from RCTs of interventions. At the least, future studies should follow the CONSORT recommendations about reporting harm-related issues. To address adverse effects, future systematic reviews should also include non-randomized studies.

Disability Outcome Measures in Phase III Clinical Trials in Multiple Sclerosis

Accumulating neurological disability has a substantial impact on the lives of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). As well as the established Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), several other outcome measures are now available for assessing disability progression in MS. This review extends the findings of a previous analysis of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) trials published up to 2012, to determine whether there has been a shift in outcome measures used to assess disability in phase III clinical trials in RRMS and progressive MS. Forty relevant trials were identified (RRMS, n = 16; progressive MS, n = 18; other/mixed phenotypes, n = 6). Sustained EDSS worsening, particularly over 3 months, was included as an endpoint in almost all identified trials. Other disability-related endpoints included the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite z-score and scores for the physical component summary of the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale and Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form (36-item) Health Survey. Tests assessing manual dexterity, ambulation, vision and cognition were also employed, and in some trials, composite endpoints were used. However, there was no obvious trend in choice of disability outcome measures over time. Sustained EDSS worsening over short time periods continues to be the most widely used measure of disability progression in pivotal MS trials, despite its well-recognised limitations. A new tool set is needed for use in MS clinical trials that detects the benefit of potential treatments that slow (or reverse) progressive disability.

No effect of intravenous immunoglobulins on cytokine-producing lymphocytes in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) have been effective in reducing multiple sclerosis (MS) disease activity and improving disability scores. However, the mechanism by which this beneficial effect is achieved remains unclear. An effect of IVIG on pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines- which are thought to play a role in the disease process- has been postulated in a number of animal and ex vivo studies. Hence, we performed a study on 34 patients with secondary progressive (SP) MS being treated with monthly IVIG or placebo for two years according to the protocol of the ESIMS study. Clinical outcome measures and cytokine production (interferon gamma, tumour necrosis factor alpha, interleukin-4 and -10) were recorded in all patients and compared with respect to the treatment group. Against our expectations, IVIG did not reduce the relapse rate or the progression of disability or cytokine production. Our data argue against an enduring immunomodulating effect of IVIG, at least in SPMS.

MRI results from the European Study on Intravenous Immunoglobulin in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis (ESIMS)

Background: Monthly application of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) to patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) showed no clinical benefit in the European Study on Immunoglobulin in MS (ESIMS). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results may provide insights into the morphologic consequences of such treatment. Methods: A total of 318 patients (mean age 44± 7 years) were enrolled in 31 European and Canadian centres and treated monthly with 1 g/kg body weight of IVIG or equivalent amounts of albumin 0.1% for 27 months. MRI was performed at baseline and after 12 and 24 months and comprised of conventional dual-echo T2-weighted and T1-weighted scans before and after application of 0.1 mmol/kg Gd-DTPA. Results: Similar to clinical variables, MRI measures at baseline were well comparable between treatment groups except for a somewhat lower mean number of contrast-enhancing lesions and number of active scans in IVIG-treated patients. Over the trial period there was almost no change of the T2-lesion load and the ‘black hole’ volume in both treatment groups and the cumulative number of contrast-enhancing lesions were similar. There was only a trend for fewer new or enlarged T2-lesions in IVIG patients, which disappeared after correction for the imbalance in the number of contrast-enhancing lesions at baseline. Brain volume in terms of a partial cerebral fraction decreased significantly less with IVIG than placebo treatment (final visit:-0.62± 0.88% versus-0.88± 0.91%; P= 0.009). This difference remained statistically significant with correction for active lesions at baseline (P= 0.02) and was seen primarily in male patients and those with an Expanded Disability Status Scale score ≥ 6 and no relapses in the two years before the study. Conclusion: The absence of significant differences in conventional MRI measures between both treatment groups parallels the negative clinical results of ESIMS. The causes for and possible long-term clinical effects of a lower rate of brain volume loss in IVIG patients should be explored further.

Use of intravenous immunoglobulin for treatment of neurologic conditions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Given the increasing use of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for various neurologic conditions and uncertainty pertaining to its benefits and harms, a systematic review was conducted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating IVIG for all neurologic indications for which there was at least one published trial.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

For this systematic review, a systematic search strategy was applied to MEDLINE (1966-June 2003) and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (June 2003) to identify potentially eligible RCTs comparing IVIG to placebo or an active control. All dosage regimens were considered. Abstracts were excluded, and no restriction was placed on language of publication. Two investigators independently performed data extraction with a standardized form. Measures of effect were calculated for each trial independently, and studies were pooled based on clinical and methodologic judgment as to its appropriateness. Where pooling of trials was inappropriate, a qualitative discussion of findings is provided.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-seven trials representing 14 conditions were identified. IVIG is more effective than placebo for treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and idiopathic chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. There is also potential benefit for treatment of multifocal motor neuropathy, myasthenia gravis, dermatomyositis, stiff-person syndrome, and Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether IVIG therapy was more effective than plasma exchange for Guillain-Barré syndrome. There was also insufficient evidence regarding paraprotein-associated polyneuropathy. No evidence of benefit was observed for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis or inclusion body myositis.

Intravenous immunoglobulin in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: randomised placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Several double-blind placebo-controlled trials of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis have shown beneficial effects of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) on relapse rate and disability. The European Study on Intravenous Immunoglobulin in Multiple Sclerosis set out to test IVIG in the secondary progressive phase of the disease.

METHODS

318 patients with clinically definite secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (mean age 44 years [SD 7]) were randomly assigned IVIG 1 g/kg per month (n=159) or an equivalent volume of placebo (albumin 0.1%; n=159) for 27 months. After baseline investigation, clinical assessments were made every 3 months and MRI was repeated after 12 months and 24 months. The primary outcome was confirmed worsening of disability as defined by the time to first confirmed progression on the expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Analyses were by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

19 patients in the IVIG group and 39 in the placebo group terminated study treatment prematurely but were included in the analyses. IVIG treatment had no beneficial effect on time to confirmed EDSS progression (hazard ratio 1.11 [95% CI 0.80-1.53] for IVIG versus placebo). The annual relapse rate was 0.46 in both groups. No significant differences between the treatment groups were found in any of the other clinical outcome measures or in the change of T2-lesion load over time. The treatment was generally well tolerated, although deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or both occurred in seven patients with risk factors for thromboembolism (IVIG six, placebo one).

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with IVIG in this study did not show any clinical benefit and therefore cannot be recommended for patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.

Low interleukin-10 production is associated with higher disability and MRI lesion load in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

Abnormalities in T-cell-derived cytokine production are a well-known phenomenon in multiple sclerosis (MS). An association between disability and the production of interferon gamma has been demonstrated recently. The present study investigated associations between disability, cytokine production in stimulated blood lymphocytes and magnetic resonance imaging data in 37 patients with the secondary progressive course in the stable phase of the disease. Patients with high interleukin-10 (IL-10) production had significantly lower disability scores (p=0.009) and lower T2 lesion load (p=0.03). Interleukin-10 might not only play a role in the pathological process of multiple sclerosis but has an impact on disease outcome as well.